🚀 go-pugleaf

It was reported that FBI "forgot" to disclose certain documents on McVeigh;
some say, 3000 plus documents, some say, 3000 plus pages.  McVeigh's lawyer
was shown with several boxes of paper.  Each such box contains at least
10,000 pages, so clearly, we are talking about 3000 documents.  An FBI
representative said that FBI had 1 BILLION documents on McVeigh, so 3000
documents constitute only 3 in a million, which is an excellent performance.

Do they really have 1 BILLION documents on McVeigh?  Let us do some
arithmetics.  A book of 500 pages is about 4 cm thick, so elementary
computations show that I BILLION pages will be 80 km thick!  If you presume,
that you can read 1 page per second, it will take you 32 years (24 hours per
day, 365 days per year) to read them.  In reality, you need at least 1
minute to read a page, so you will have to spend more than 1800 years!
These FBI guys take public for dumbheads.

Second question: did FBI really forgot to disclose documents?  The media
reported that FBI computer system is "antiquated".  I do not buy it for a
second: FBI never had any problem with money, and I am sure they have newest
and fastest computers.  There was a show recently about the Security
Intelligence Agency, and the Agency representative proudly said that they
had more computer power on a square yard than any other place on earth.
There is no reason to believe that FBI would be far behind.  Even presuming
that FBI computers are slow, it has nothing to do with their ability to
retrieve documents: slow computers just require more time to do the same
thing.

Yellow media reported one FBI analyst saying that she did not want to
introduce her documents into a computer database, because she was afraid
that she would not be able later to retrieve them.  I have a surprise for
her: introduction of a document into a computer means making a copy of the
document into a magnetic media, she still has the document on paper, so she
has nothing to loose.  On the other hand, if she does NOT introduce her
document into a database, she would certainly not be able to retrieve it.
Did the yellow reporter know this?  Of course!  So, why is he doing this?
Because majority of the public do not know computers and can be duped.  Were
you duped?

One should note, that nobody mentions, how many documents WERE disclosed.
In my case, there were not even 100 documents disclosed.  Presume, that in
McVeigh case there were 10 times more documents and this will come to 1000
documents, which is a lot.  Now, 3000 documents undisclosed is 3 times
bigger than what was disclosed.  One can not just "forget" major part of
documents.  It is my understanding that the undisclosed documents are
dealing with existence of John Doe #2.  Several people claim to have seen
him.  If FBI admits his existence, this would mean that FBI did not do its
job.  It is much more convenient to claim that the matter is closed
successfully.

Some people say, that since McVeigh admitted planting of the bomb, no
document could change anything.  History knows quite a number of false
confessions.  McVeigh could have confessed to something he did not do in
order to protect someone, who is dear to him.  Majority of people, who knew
him, say that they hate what he has done, but that they still love him.  The
same thing A.Rooney said about Senator Kerrey: he did not like what Kerrey
did, but he liked the man.  There is though one difference: McVeigh is
waiting to be executed, while Kerrey is hailed as American hero.  Should not
Kerrey be sitting in the next cell?

So, government knew all alone that 3000 plus documents were not disclosed to
McVeigh.  Why have they decided to disclose them now?  This is what my
paranoidal mind tells me.  US government does not like the situation where
McVeigh effectively spits in their faces, since he decided to get out "with
a bang".  They know that McVeigh's execution will make him in the eyes of
many a martyr.  US government wants McVeigh to beg them for his life, this
is why they are throwing at him this bait - new evidence, and his lawyers,
paid by government, are trying to convince McVeigh to continue his appeals,
though they know full well, that nothing will come from these appeals.

The main legal question here is: did McVeigh have a fair trial?  Let us
recount facts.  His lawyer Jones got $10 MILLION - a very good pay to sell
his client, and sell he did.  First, he simulated break-in into his
computer, when he revealed to the media the contents of his private
conversations with McVeigh.  I do not believe Jones was so dumb to keep
sensitive documents unscrambled.  After all the newspapers in the country
published that McVeigh admitted to Jones that he planted the bomb, there was
no point to go to trial - the guilty verdict was guaranteed.

The next question is: did his lawyer do his best on the sentencing stage to
protect the life of his client?  I quote just one sentence from Jones'
speech: he told the jury that though his client has killed more innocent
people than Bundy, Dahlmer and other famous mass murderers combined, he
should not be sentenced to die.  With such a lawyer, who needs a prosecutor?
He effectively equated his client with people, who killed for pleasure.  Is
Jones really that stupid?  No, he was very well paid to sell his client, and
he did.  McVeigh has finally understood Jones' treachery and fired him, but
it was too late.

Now, what would an honest lawyer do in McVeigh case?  He should have called
to testify Kelly (butcher of Vietnamese village My Lai), Senator Kerrey and
other well known war criminals, and asked them to describe in detail, how
they cut throats, raped, mutilated innocent unarmed civilians, and how they
got away with their crimes.  The jury saw the pictures of victims of
Oklahoma bombing, an honest lawyer should show them pictures of people
killed at My Lai, pictures of people burnt alive at Waco, picture of the
wife and little child of Randy Weaver, killed by government with impunity
(nobody was prosecuted for these murders).

In his argument, an honest lawyer should ask the jury whether there is much
difference between what Senator Kerrey did, and what his client did, and if
there is not much difference, then he should ask the jury, why should his
client be treated differently from the way Senator Kerrey is being treated.

The logic of McVeigh's defense should have been as follows.  He was pursued
by US government for multiple premeditated murders, and the honest lawyer
should have shown to the jury that US government itself is guilty of
multiple premeditated murders of its own citizens, as well as citizens of
other countries, so it has no right to pursue anyone, including his client,
for murder.  This would be a bomb!

McVeigh was a bonanza to some architectural firms: they are now making a lot
of money designing buildings for US government, which are capable to
withstand explosions.  Nobody is telling US government, that there is a much
cheaper way to make its buildings safe: to stop its criminal behavior, and
nobody would want to blow up US government buildings in the first place.

I wish to make it clear: I do NOT condone McVeigh in any shape or form, I
would not be able to live with myself, had I harmed even one innocent
person.  All I am saying is: justice should be not just for McVeigh, but for
all.  If McVeigh is waiting execution, Senator Kerrey, Janet Reno and many
other murderers should be his neighbors.  By the way, had Janet Reno and
others been prosecuted in due time, there would be no bombing in Oklahoma.
---

It is regretful that I was right in my previous posting: I suggested there
that all this story of FBI forgetting to forward certain documents was
nothing but a spectacle.  Government was very upset that McVeigh decided to
go on his terms and with a bang.  They were desperate to make him ask to
spare his life and to deny him his request.  Regretfully, he fell for it.

Let us get to the detail.  At the first news that FBI did not forward
certain documents, US Attorney General cancelled execution, and send
treacherous lawyers to convince McVeigh to file a motion for a stay of
execution.  It is obvious that McVeigh resisted for quite a while.  So,
government introduced a heavy artillery - media.  They presented to the show
"60 Minutes" several recently fired FBI agents, who were telling that FBI
deliberately withheld documents, and one of agents even mentioned that he
personally has produced several exculpatory documents, which were never
presented to the court.  When this agent was asked about contents of this
document he said that he could not answer because of a gag order.  Excuse
me, what kind of a gag order could exist for a man fired from FBI?
Obviously, it was a spectacle designed for McVeigh personal consumption, and
he fell for it: two days after the show, it was reported that he decided to
file the motion for a stay of execution.  US government got what it wanted.

The next step was to arrange with the lawyers such a motion that could be
denied.  The situation was such that a proper motion could not possibly be
denied.  Indeed, it was Attorney General, who decided to order delay to give
lawyers time to study the documents.  Clearly, one month time is an
arbitrary quantity, and should the lawyers filed an Habeas Corpus motion,
arguing only that one month time was arbitrary and not sufficient, Attorney
General could say nothing, because it was his initiative, and there was no
way anyone can prove that one month is enough to study 4000 documents.

Instead of doing what I described above, treacherous lawyers presented a
motion not based on Habeas Corpus, but on a civil statute, claiming that
government has perpetrated a fraud upon the court.  When you make such a
statement, you should be prepared to prove it, which lawyers did not bother
to do.  In view of this kind of motion, it was easy for the judge to say
that there was no evidence of fraud presented, and therefore the motion was
denied.  In exactly the same way, as his first lawyer Jones betrayed him
during his trial, his new lawyers betrayed him with this motion.

Had the lawyers really wanted to claim the fraud, they should have called to
testify each and every FBI agent, who handled these 4000 documents and
examine them under oath as to how it happened that the documents were not
forwarded to the defence during the trial.  They should have also called
these fired FBI agents, who participated in "60 Minutes".  A good lawyer
would have no difficulty to prove that it was a fraud indeed, but these
lawyers were very well paid by the government and they did what government
asked them to do: betrayed their client.

McVeigh finally understood that he has been had.  Too bad.

Fabrikant